6 ms·

He did suggest that the natural percentage of women in tech would be below 50%, and it would take "authoritarian" measures to reach 50% or greater.

dguaraglia 9y ago
Indeed, and that's where the argument that he's "all for equality" falls flat on it's ass. I call that kind of reasoning "benevolent bigotry": "ohhh, of course black lives matter! But you know, black people are predisposed to be criminals, so it's understandable if they get shot more frequently..." It's unbelievable that in 2017, in a field that is vastly dominated by males, someone would have the gall to claim "trying to introduce more diversity is repression." Can you imagine if the roles were reversed, and the nurses association said "well, we don't really want more males in the profession because they are clearly not biologically ready to deal with people. We'd love to have them, but clearly they are not interested so we'll set a quota on how many can be certified per year"? The same people defending Damore would be flipping their shit.
- Chris2048 9y ago
  > the argument that he's "all for equality" falls flat on it's ass Because it's not your definition of equality? Why not impress us with your own brand of philosophy by writing a cited, 10-page memo on the topic, then maybe you'll get buy-in. > It's unbelievable that in 2017 Why? Is 2017 the year that its ok to repress individuals in favour of their respective political/identity group statistics? "introducing more diversity" is a sinister sugar-coating of what's happening here. > we don't really want more males in the profession because they are clearly not biologically ready to deal with people You mean imagine an entirely different thing? If someone explained why so few men chose to go into nursing using the same reasoning, they would not "[flip] their shit" - only because you manufactured an aspect not in the memo. He doubly-so didn't suggest setting a quota on women in IT, which is the cherry on the strawman.
  - dguaraglia 9y ago
    Man, I just found a comment where you compare Damore to Rosa Parks. Literally, go fuck yourself. You are so far gone up your own ass, I don't think there's enough horses in the world to pull you out of it.
    - Chris2048 9y ago
      Yes, you did, and I responded to that. I didn't "compare Damore to Rosa Parks", someone argued that Damore shouldn't have voiced his opinion for fear of not being hireable, and I compared this to Rosa Parks being told she'd have difficulty catching a bus. Given the comments you've posted already across HN, I believe it is you that has a problem.
      - unityByFreedom 9y ago
        > I didn't "compare Damore to Rosa Parks" > someone argued that Damore shouldn't have voiced his opinion for fear of not being hireable, I compared this to Rosa Parks being told she'd have difficulty catching a bus Same thing.
        Chris2048 9y ago
        No it isn't.
        fche 9y ago
        Stop pretending that "comparing" is ipso facto bad.
        dguaraglia 9y ago
        Stop pretending that you are a repressed minority.
        Chris2048 9y ago
        Repression is is still repression, even if to an individual who is a member of a "majority" group, because they are still individuals; and who gets to decide which groupings and individual characteristics are relevant anyway? No one is "pretending [they] are a repressed minority", you just assume this because you think that has to be the case before individual equality is necessary. Minorities and majorities, repressed or otherwise, all deserve fair treatment.
- deleted 9y ago
  [deleted]
- brailsafe 9y ago
  This profoundly misrepresents the statements in the memo.
  - palerdot 9y ago
    How so? This comment kind of sums up what Damore was suggesting. Also, I think Damore's 50/50 diversity logic stoked lot of bad feelings both for and against. No diversity policy aims for 50/50, rather help raise the percentage of under represented (in this case women) more than what was in the past. He modelled his whole memo based on this 50/50 diversity split and went on to suggest that biologically 50/50 representation is not at all possible, which may be true but that is not the point or aim of a diverse workplace.
    - imartin2k 9y ago
      Actually, I don't think you can sum up a lenghty "manifest" about a tricky topic in a few sentences without misrepresenting its points and losing the nuance. That might be one of the core reasons why the whole thing got out of hand. I read the memo 3 times over several days just to make sure that I don't miss a key thing (and I'm still no fully sure). But I bet a hell lots of people who commented on it didn't even read it thoroughly once. One could argue though that Damore should have expected this (but maybe he actually did. I can totally imagine that he had mentally prepared himself before to get fired over this).
      - dguaraglia 9y ago
        > Actually, I don't think you can sum up a lenghty "manifest" about a tricky topic in a few sentences without misrepresenting its points and losing the nuance When you want to prove a paper wrong you don't need delve on every nuance, you just need to prove the base premise is flawed. Not sure why Damore deserves a different treatment, when clearly he's trying to build an argument and proposes "solutions" based on it. > One could argue though that Damore should have expected this Oh, I'm pretty sure he was looking for this.
        9y ago
- fche 9y ago
  > It's unbelievable that in 2017, in a field that is vastly dominated by males, someone would have the gall to claim "trying to introduce more diversity is repression." From the point of view of a young white male fresh out of school, to hold them back for no other reason than a female PoC is deemed more diversically attractive, is indeed repression.
  - dguaraglia 9y ago
    Do you realize how hypocritical your position is? You are OK with a woman not being hired because of gender bias - which exists right now, instead of in a potential future imagined by Damore - as long as you get hired. In other words: let's not solve the current problems, just so that we introduce one that might potentially affect you. Nice.
    - Chris2048 9y ago
      > a woman not being hired because of gender bias - which exists right now Proof/citations please. And with "concrete numbers" - if you are going to correct for bias, you need to know its magnitude.
      - dguaraglia 9y ago
        Easy: people like Damore exist. You exist. With people like you in the field, it's clear that there's a segment of the population who is OK to apply gender bias. Concrete numbers? Just look at the current 80%/20% division. Considering people like Damore exist, it's fair to assume that at least a >0% skew exists because of gender bias. But don't take it from me, just go ask any woman o(even the ones that Damore mentions in his memo.) Next question? (BTW, what a ridiculous argument you are trying to make. Even Damore, who you take as an eminent authority in the subject, admits there's gender bias in the industry.)
        Chris2048 9y ago
        > people like Damore Whatever. When facts fail, thrown around labels and malicious speculation. > people like you in the field ... OK to apply gender bias > Even Damore ... admits there's gender bias in the industry Please provide quotes for either me or Damore being in favor of some kind of "[application] of gender bias". Or that where I claim there is no gender bias? Please drop that strawman. > it's fair to assume that at least a >0% skew exists because of gender bias. And Where does Damore claim there is no gender bias? Other than right at the beginning where he says "I am not denying sexism exists". > go ask any woman seriously.. > what a ridiculous argument you are trying to make Well, you are the eminent authority of ridiculous arguments.

dguaraglia 9y ago

Indeed, and that's where the argument that he's "all for equality" falls flat on it's ass. I call that kind of reasoning "benevolent bigotry": "ohhh, of course black lives matter! But you know, black people are predisposed to be criminals, so it's understandable if they get shot more frequently..." It's unbelievable that in 2017, in a field that is vastly dominated by males, someone would have the gall to claim "trying to introduce more diversity is repression." Can you imagine if the roles were reversed, and the nurses association said "well, we don't really want more males in the profession because they are clearly not biologically ready to deal with people. We'd love to have them, but clearly they are not interested so we'll set a quota on how many can be certified per year"? The same people defending Damore would be flipping their shit.

Chris2048 9y ago
> the argument that he's "all for equality" falls flat on it's ass Because it's not your definition of equality? Why not impress us with your own brand of philosophy by writing a cited, 10-page memo on the topic, then maybe you'll get buy-in. > It's unbelievable that in 2017 Why? Is 2017 the year that its ok to repress individuals in favour of their respective political/identity group statistics? "introducing more diversity" is a sinister sugar-coating of what's happening here. > we don't really want more males in the profession because they are clearly not biologically ready to deal with people You mean imagine an entirely different thing? If someone explained why so few men chose to go into nursing using the same reasoning, they would not "[flip] their shit" - only because you manufactured an aspect not in the memo. He doubly-so didn't suggest setting a quota on women in IT, which is the cherry on the strawman.
- dguaraglia 9y ago
  Man, I just found a comment where you compare Damore to Rosa Parks. Literally, go fuck yourself. You are so far gone up your own ass, I don't think there's enough horses in the world to pull you out of it.
  - Chris2048 9y ago
    Yes, you did, and I responded to that. I didn't "compare Damore to Rosa Parks", someone argued that Damore shouldn't have voiced his opinion for fear of not being hireable, and I compared this to Rosa Parks being told she'd have difficulty catching a bus. Given the comments you've posted already across HN, I believe it is you that has a problem.
    - unityByFreedom 9y ago
      > I didn't "compare Damore to Rosa Parks" > someone argued that Damore shouldn't have voiced his opinion for fear of not being hireable, I compared this to Rosa Parks being told she'd have difficulty catching a bus Same thing.
      - Chris2048 9y ago
        No it isn't.
      - fche 9y ago
        Stop pretending that "comparing" is ipso facto bad.
        dguaraglia 9y ago
        Stop pretending that you are a repressed minority.
        Chris2048 9y ago
        Repression is is still repression, even if to an individual who is a member of a "majority" group, because they are still individuals; and who gets to decide which groupings and individual characteristics are relevant anyway? No one is "pretending [they] are a repressed minority", you just assume this because you think that has to be the case before individual equality is necessary. Minorities and majorities, repressed or otherwise, all deserve fair treatment.
deleted 9y ago
[deleted]
brailsafe 9y ago
This profoundly misrepresents the statements in the memo.
- palerdot 9y ago
  How so? This comment kind of sums up what Damore was suggesting. Also, I think Damore's 50/50 diversity logic stoked lot of bad feelings both for and against. No diversity policy aims for 50/50, rather help raise the percentage of under represented (in this case women) more than what was in the past. He modelled his whole memo based on this 50/50 diversity split and went on to suggest that biologically 50/50 representation is not at all possible, which may be true but that is not the point or aim of a diverse workplace.
  - imartin2k 9y ago
    Actually, I don't think you can sum up a lenghty "manifest" about a tricky topic in a few sentences without misrepresenting its points and losing the nuance. That might be one of the core reasons why the whole thing got out of hand. I read the memo 3 times over several days just to make sure that I don't miss a key thing (and I'm still no fully sure). But I bet a hell lots of people who commented on it didn't even read it thoroughly once. One could argue though that Damore should have expected this (but maybe he actually did. I can totally imagine that he had mentally prepared himself before to get fired over this).
    - dguaraglia 9y ago
      > Actually, I don't think you can sum up a lenghty "manifest" about a tricky topic in a few sentences without misrepresenting its points and losing the nuance When you want to prove a paper wrong you don't need delve on every nuance, you just need to prove the base premise is flawed. Not sure why Damore deserves a different treatment, when clearly he's trying to build an argument and proposes "solutions" based on it. > One could argue though that Damore should have expected this Oh, I'm pretty sure he was looking for this.
      - 9y ago
fche 9y ago
> It's unbelievable that in 2017, in a field that is vastly dominated by males, someone would have the gall to claim "trying to introduce more diversity is repression." From the point of view of a young white male fresh out of school, to hold them back for no other reason than a female PoC is deemed more diversically attractive, is indeed repression.
- dguaraglia 9y ago
  Do you realize how hypocritical your position is? You are OK with a woman not being hired because of gender bias - which exists right now, instead of in a potential future imagined by Damore - as long as you get hired. In other words: let's not solve the current problems, just so that we introduce one that might potentially affect you. Nice.
  - Chris2048 9y ago
    > a woman not being hired because of gender bias - which exists right now Proof/citations please. And with "concrete numbers" - if you are going to correct for bias, you need to know its magnitude.
    - dguaraglia 9y ago
      Easy: people like Damore exist. You exist. With people like you in the field, it's clear that there's a segment of the population who is OK to apply gender bias. Concrete numbers? Just look at the current 80%/20% division. Considering people like Damore exist, it's fair to assume that at least a >0% skew exists because of gender bias. But don't take it from me, just go ask any woman o(even the ones that Damore mentions in his memo.) Next question? (BTW, what a ridiculous argument you are trying to make. Even Damore, who you take as an eminent authority in the subject, admits there's gender bias in the industry.)
      - Chris2048 9y ago
        > people like Damore Whatever. When facts fail, thrown around labels and malicious speculation. > people like you in the field ... OK to apply gender bias > Even Damore ... admits there's gender bias in the industry Please provide quotes for either me or Damore being in favor of some kind of "[application] of gender bias". Or that where I claim there is no gender bias? Please drop that strawman. > it's fair to assume that at least a >0% skew exists because of gender bias. And Where does Damore claim there is no gender bias? Other than right at the beginning where he says "I am not denying sexism exists". > go ask any woman seriously.. > what a ridiculous argument you are trying to make Well, you are the eminent authority of ridiculous arguments.